1 / 6

The relationship between agencies & the judicial branch

The relationship between agencies & the judicial branch. Appellate court standards of review of lower courts:. Review of what?. Standard of review. Lower court legal conclusion Lower court fact finding Lower court evidentiary/procedural rulings Jury fact finding. De Novo Clearly erroneous

deo
Download Presentation

The relationship between agencies & the judicial branch

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. The relationship between agencies & the judicial branch Appellate court standards of review of lower courts: Review of what? Standard of review • Lower court legal conclusion • Lower court fact finding • Lower court evidentiary/procedural rulings • Jury fact finding • De Novo • Clearly erroneous • Abuse of Discretion • Deference/jury standard To what extent do courts review agency findings of fact/law under similar or different standards and why?

  2. The purpose of judicial review: Appellate courts use different standards to review lower court findings because there are different purposes in reviewing law & facts: • Facts: Jury and lower court are in better position to assess facts - use more deferential standards than “de novo” review • Law: Court of appeals is best equipped to say what the law is -- need give no deference to another court’s findings of law Goals of judicial review of administrative findings are essentially the same (allocate decision-making authority) BUT the standards are different: • Tend to involve greater deference to agency findings AND are different in verbal formulation

  3. Overton Park – the facts • DOT Act & Federal-Aid Hiway Act give Sec’y of Trans. the power to approve release of funds for certain highway projects. • Those laws prohibited Sec’y from releasing funds for hiways built through fed parks unless there was no other “feasible & prudent” alternative route. • Sec’y released funds for the Overton Park highway project. • Citizen group sued claiming that Secretary’s decision was invalid because it lacked formal findings. • District and appellate courts agreed with the Sec’y that no formal findings necessary. • SCT agreed no formal findings were necessary BUT granted certiorari anyway to determine whether the Sec’ys decision was appropriate

  4. Overton Park – the feasibility of judicial review • APA Section 701 provides that judicial review of agency action (see §§ 702 & 704) is available unless: • Judicial review is precluded by statute (§ 701(a)(1)) • Agency action is committed to agency discretion by law (§ 701(a)(2)) • What is SCT’s reasoning as to why the Sec’ys action is not committed to agency discretion? • Why should Congress provide for judicial review of the Secy’s decision to release hiway funds? • Does this kind of action lend itself to judicial review? • What barriers are there to judicial review? • Why might judicial review be important anyway?

  5. APA standards of review – section 706 • Which standard of review did SCT find appropriate in Overton Park? • APA Section 706 • . . . The reviewing court shall. . . . (2) hold unlawful and set aside agency actions, findings, conclusions of law when • (A) arbitrary, capricious, abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law • (B) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege or immunity • (C) in excess of statutory jurisdiction . . . . • (D) without observance of procedure required by law • (E) unsupported by substantial evidence if a case subject to §§ 556, 557 (i.e., an on-the-record proceeding) • (F) unwarranted by facts to the extent the facts are subject to trial de novo by reviewing court

  6. SCT’s action in Overton Park • After finding the appropriate standard of review, what action does SCT take in Overton Park? Why? • How will the DCT go about doing that given the informal nature of the Sec’ys decision?

More Related